金门的边界身份认同初探

doi:10.18306/dlkxjz.2017.12.007

Abstract

Abstract:

Quemoy has long been regarded as a border area in the cross-strait geopolitical strategy. Different forces with different political considerations have intervened in the affairs of Quemoy at different times, which resulted in the constantly changing identity of Quemoy. Based on field interviews and a thorough review of literature, and using the research methods of scale analysis and border studies, the authors examined the grassroots "border identity" in Quemoy. The redefinition process of the meaning of border was also discussed. This research concludes that, the "border identity" was gradually formed as a result of Quemoy residents' passive or active adjustment to changes in geopolitical relationship and borderlines between Taiwan and the mainland of China. In the temporal dimension, Quemoy has experienced several times of geopolitical changes during different historical periods, including the period of "Fan Qing Fu Ming" (rebelling against the Qing Dynasty and rebuilding the Ming Dynasty), Japanese-ruled period, the Nationalist Party-ruled period, and when the cross-strait "Three Links" were restored. In the spatial dimension, due to its special geographical position, and the fact that it used to be under the governance of different governments at different times, Quemoy has four different but interlacing scales of identity: it is a county, a province, and meanwhile an island and the community for the local residents. As a result, a local identity was gradually formed among the residents. They launched a series of social movements so as to get rid of the martial law imposed on Quemoy. From being passively adjusted to new situations, to actively utilizing the "border effect," the local people have re-institutionalized and reconstructed Quemoy's identity, changing it from a battle front into a peaceful trade island. This research provides a grassroots analytical perspective of geo-strategy and may help deepen the understanding for the cross-strait border area and China's reunification process. Apart from this, it will also contribute to the current studies on China’s border areas.

Key words: Quemoy, border, identity, scale

Heqiang ZHANG, Yungang LIU. Border identity of Quemoy[J].PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2017, 36(12): 1521-1530.

Figures/Tables 8

Fig.1

Tab.1

Fig.2

Tab.2

Tab.3

Tab.4

Fig.3

Fig.4

References 22

[23]	Hall S.1996. Introduction: Who needs 'identity'[M]// Hall S, du Gay P. Questions of cultural identity[M]. London, England: Sage Publications.
[24]	Kramsch O T, Brambilla C.2007. Transboundary Europe through a West African looking glass: Cross-border integration, "colonial difference" and the chance for "border thinking"[J]. Comparativ: Leipziger Beiträge Zur Universalgeschichte und Vergleichenden Gesellschaftsforschung, 17(4): 95-116.
[25]	Newman D.2006. The lines that continue to separate us: Borders in our 'borderless' world[J]. Progress in Human Geography, 30(2): 143-161. doi: 10.1191/0309132506ph599xx
[26]	Paasi A.1986. The institutionalization of regions: A theoretical framework for understanding the emergence of regions and the constitution of regional identity[J]. Fennia, 164(1): 105-146. doi: 10.1348/014466599162656
[27]	Sarup M.1996. Identity, culture and the postmodern world[M]. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.
[28]	Soja E W.1989. Postmodern geographies: The reassertion of space in critical social theory[M]. London, England: Verso Books.
[1]	蔡宏明. 2001. “小三通”对两岸互动的影响[J]. 远景季刊, 2(2): 135-161.
	[Tsai H M.2001. The Impact of "Mini Three Links" on the Interactions across the Taiwan Strait[J]. Journal of Prospect Foundation, 2(2): 135-161.]
[2]	陈建民. 2008. 金厦“小三通”对金门经济安全的影响: 从民眾认知的角度分析[J]. 远景基金会季刊, 9(4): 53-96.
	[Chen C M.2008. Influences of the "Mini-Three-Links" on Kinmen's economic security from the perspective of Kinmen residents[J]. Journal of Prospect Foundation, 9(4): 53-96.]
[3]	陈水在. 2001. 金门解严前后[M]. 台北: 稻田出版公司.
	[Chen S Z.2001. Jinmen jieyan qianhou[M]. Taipei, China: DowTien Publishes.]
[4]	何迪. 1988. “台海”危机和中国对金门、马祖政策的形成[J]. 美国研究,(3): 40-64, 4.
	[He D.1988. “The Taiwan Straits Crises” and the formation of Chinese policy on Quemoy and Matsu[J]. American Studies Quarterly,(3): 40-64, 4.]
[5]	江柏炜. 2007. 谁的战爭历史? 金门战史馆的国族历史vs.民间社会的集体记忆[J]. 民间曲艺, (156): 85-155.
	[Chiang B W.2007. Whose war history? Nationalist history of war museum vs. collective memories of folk society in Battlefield Quemoy[J]. Journal of Chinese Ritual Theatre and Folklore, (156): 85-155.]
[6]	林劲, 聂学林. 2008. 1949年以来金门在两岸关系中的地位与作用[J]. 台湾研究集刊, (4): 22-32. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-1590.2008.04.004
	[Lin J, Nie X L.2008. Kinmen's status and influence in cross strait relations since 1949[J]. Taiwan Research Quarterly, (4): 22-32.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-1590.2008.04.004
[7]	林焜熿. 1993. 金门志[M]. 南投:台湾省文献会.
	[Lin K H.1993. Quemoy Annals[M]. Nantou, China: Taiwan Provincial Documents Committee.]
[8]	林秀幸. 2007. 界线、认同和忠实性:进香,一个客家地方社群理解和认知他者的社会过程[J]. 台湾人类学刊, 5(1): 109-153.
	[Lin H H.2007. Boundaries, identities and authenticity: pilgrimage of a hakka local community as social process of understanding and cognition of others[J]. Taiwan Journal of Anthropology, 5(1): 109-153.]
[9]	刘宗勇. 2010. 两岸关系演变中金门战略价值变迁之研究[D]. 台北: “国立”政治大学.
	[Liu T Y.2010. The change of Quemoy's strategic value in current cross-strait relations[D]. Taipei, China: "National" Chengchi University.]
[10]	罗德水. 2000. 两岸关系发展与金门定位变迁之研究[D]. 新北:台湾淡江大学.
	[Luo D S.2000. Study of the cross-strait relation development & the kinmen positioning evolution [D]. Xinbei, China: Tamkang University.]
[11]	沈卫平. 2004. “八二三”炮击金门[M]. 2版. 北京: 华艺出版社.
	[Shen W P.2004. "Ba er san" paoji jinmen[M]. 2nd ed. Beijing, China: Huayi Press.]
[12]	汪毅夫, 杨彦杰, 谢重光. 1999. 金门史稿[M]. 厦门: 鹭江出版社.
	[Wang Y F, Yang Y J, Xie C G.1999. Jinmen shigao[M]. Xiamen, China: Lujiang Press.]
[13]	翁明志. 1994. 吾潮澎湃[M]. 金门: 翁明志服务处.
	[Weng M Z.1994. Wuchao pengpai[M]. Quemoy, China: Service of Ming-Chih Weng.]
[14]	吴钧尧. 2008. 金门现代文学发展之研究[D]. 台北: 台湾东吴大学.
	[Wu J Y.2008. The study of modern kinmen's literary development[D]. Taipei, China: Soochow University.]
[15]	杨树清. 1998. 金门社会观察[M]. 台北: 稻田出版有限公司.
	[Yang S Q.1998. Jinmen shehui guancha[M]. Taipei, China: DowTien Publishes.]
[16]	杨树清. 2001. 金门岛屿边缘[M]. 台北: 稻田出版公司.
	[Yang S Q.2001. Jinmen daoyu bianyuan[M]. Taipei, China: DowTien Publishes.]
[17]	赵燕菁. 2012. 大棋局: 厦门空间战略的区域视角[J]. 城市规划学刊, (5): 1-10. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-3363.2012.05.001
	[Zhao Y J.2012. The great chessboard: The spatial strategy from the perspective of Xiamen[J]. Urban Planning Forum, (5): 1-10.] doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-3363.2012.05.001
[18]	Anderson B.1991. Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism[M].2nd ed. London, England: Verso Books.
[19]	Anzaldúa G.1987. Borderlands/La Frontera: The new mestiza[M]. San Francisco, CA: Spinsters/Aunt Lute Books.
[20]	Augelli J P.1980. Nationalization of Dominican borderlands[J]. Geographical Review, 70(1): 19-35. doi: 10.2307/214365
[21]	Gómez-Peña G.1993. Warrior for Gringostroika: Essays, performance texts, and poetry[M]. St Paul, Mn: Graywolf Press.
[29]	Szonyi M.2008. Cold War Island: Quemoy on the front line[M]. New York: Cambridge University Press.
[22]	Hall S.1992. The question of cultural identity[M]//McGrew T, Hall S, Held D. Modernity and its futures. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.

时间	县域范围
1915年之前	金门未建县
1915-1937年	金门群岛、嶝岛群岛(16个岛屿)
1937-1945年	金门县政府控制嶝岛群岛(4个岛屿)。日本控制金门群岛(12个岛屿)
1945-1949年	金门群岛、嶝岛群岛(16个岛屿)
1949-1954年	大陆控制金门县人民政府嶝岛群岛(4个岛屿) 台湾当局(金门县政府)控制金门群岛(12个岛屿)
1954年至今	大陆控制同安地区嶝岛群岛(4个岛屿) 台湾当局(金门县政府)控制金门群岛、乌丘二岛(14个岛屿)

岛屿群	岛屿成员	方言	面积/km²	面积占比/%	人口	人口占比/%
金门群岛	金门本岛、烈屿岛、大担岛、二担岛、东碇岛、北碇岛、狮屿、猛虎屿、草屿、后屿、复兴屿	闽南语	151.7	90.7	136812	87.3
嶝岛群岛	大嶝岛、小嶝岛、角屿、哈白岛	闽南语	14.6	8.6	19204	12.3
乌丘二岛	大丘岛、小丘岛	莆仙话	1.2	0.7	684	0.4

认同尺度	集体类别	定义和意义
岛屿	例如：嶝岛群岛、乌丘二岛	次区域岛民集体
县	金门	1915-1937年,中华民国金门县; 1938-1945年,抗日战争时期,县政府在大嶝岛的金门县; 1945-1949年,中华民国金门县; 1949-1971年,大陆只管辖嶝岛群岛的金门县; 1949-1954年,台湾当局控制金门群岛的金门县。 1954年至今,台湾当局控制金门群岛和乌丘二岛的总称。
省	“福建省政府”	1949-1956年,从福州迁驻金门的台湾当局“福建省政府”; 1956-1996年,从金门迁驻台北办公的“福建省政府” 1996年至今,重新迁回金门办公的 “福建省政府”;
集体	“中华民国”	“中华民国”,而非台湾。

	1991年			1996年		增减比较
	数量		比例/%		数量	比例/%
总计	764286	100.00		894629	100.00	17.05
台湾地区	760464	99.51		891661	99.67	17.24
澎湖	3660	0.48		3657	0.41	-0.08
金马地区	3731	0.49		2968	0.33	-20.45
金门	2769	0.36		2245	0.25	-18.92
马祖	962	0.13		723	0.08	-24.84

Border identity of Quemoy

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

Like

Knowledge

Cited

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 8

References 22

Related Articles 15

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	LIANG Xinyuan, JIN Xiaobin, HAN Bo, SUN Rui, ZHANG Xiaolin, ZHOU Yinkang. Landscape multifunctionality change in rapidly urbanized areas of the Yangtze River Delta:A case study of Suzhou City [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2021, 40(2): 207-219.
[2]	CHEN Mingxing, HUANG Xinrong, HUANG Gengzhi, YANG Yanshan. New urbanization and informal employment: Scale, pattern, and social integration [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2021, 40(1): 50-60.
[3]	CHEN Xiaoyan, XU Dong, HUANG Rui, HU Xiaohai, HUANG Zhenfang, ZHANG Chen. Spatial spillover effects of county-scale tourism economic growth in Zhejiang Province [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2020, 39(9): 1512-1521.
[4]	YE Chao, TA Na. Rebuild place: The thoughts of place in human geography and their connections with GIS [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2020, 39(8): 1249-1259.
[5]	ZHU Shengjun, HUANG Yongyuan, HU Xiaohui. Research framework and prospect of industrial value chain upgrading and spatial upgrading based on a multiple scale perspective [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2020, 39(8): 1367-1384.
[6]	LIU Xiaopeng, CHENG Jing, ZHAO Xiaoyong, MIAO Hong, WEI Jingyi, ZENG Duan, MA Cunxia. Sustainable poverty reduction of China in a view of development geography [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2020, 39(6): 892-901.
[7]	SONG Zhouying, ZHU Qiaoling. Development of trade between China’s provinces and Pakistan and influencing factors under the background of the Belt and Road Initiative [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2020, 39(11): 1785-1797.
[8]	CHEN Xiao, HUANG Yujin, LI Jiahui, WANG Shiyang, PEI Tao. Clustering characteristics of COVID-19 cases and influencing factors in Chongqing Municipality [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2020, 39(11): 1798-1808.
[9]	LV Minjuan, CAO Xiaoshu. Allometric scaling analysis of population and accessibility on the Loess Plateau from 1980 to 2016 [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2020, 39(11): 1884-1897.
[10]	WAN Hui, ZHU Hong. Gender, resources, and power of female cross-border marriage immigrants’ home space: A case of villages in Western Guangdong Province [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2020, 39(11): 1909-1922.
[11]	CHEN Tao, HE Canfei. A review on geographies of international trade [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2020, 39(10): 1732-1746.
[12]	XIAO Hongyuan, WANG Mingfeng. Beyond the public/private dichotomy: The study of domestic violence in feminist geography [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2020, 39(1): 143-152.
[13]	ZHU Qing,LIAO Kaihua,LAI Xiaoming,LIU Ya,LV Ligang. A review of soil water monitoring and modelling across spatial scales in the watershed [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2019, 38(8): 1150-1158.
[14]	GAO Jungfeng,GAO Yongnian,ZHANG Zhiming. Theory and application of aquatic ecoregion delineation in lake-basin [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2019, 38(8): 1159-1170.
[15]	Liang ZHOU, Qi ZHAO, Fan YANG. Identification of urban agglomeration boundary based on POI and NPP/VIIRS night light data [J]. PROGRESS IN GEOGRAPHY, 2019, 38(6): 840-850.